D&D (2024) Monster Manual Organisation

[Bae'zel]

Well at least it's good to hear that it works for some people's brains.

I find the new structure more intuitive than any other MM I’ve encountered.

On the other hand, I was never very good at the information architecture side of UX Design. I always wanted flat lists sorted by alpha over elaborate categorizations. I prefer tagging instead of grouping.

 

[SteveC]

As I'm thinking about this, I'm shaking my head. On a book like this, how many people are involved? No one thought about consistently placing creatures based on name? If I had to do a top ten list of things people have argued about with previous Monster Manuals, this would be easily in the top 5.

If I pick up this book I will buy it for VTT use, so I will never see this organization. But it once again shows how the presentation of the physical book was not as high a priority as (in my opinion) it should have been.

 

[DavyGreenwind]

A lot of the demon and devil lore was moved to the DMG, for what it is worth.

 

[mamba]

No one thought about consistently placing creatures based on name?

isn’t that basically what they did, unlike eg the 2014 book?

 

[Mort]

As I'm thinking about this, I'm shaking my head. On a book like this, how many people are involved? No one thought about consistently placing creatures based on name? If I had to do a top ten list of things people have argued about with previous Monster Manuals, this would be easily in the top 5.

If I pick up this book I will buy it for VTT use, so I will never see this organization. But it once again shows how the presentation of the physical book was not as high a priority as (in my opinion) it should have been.

Full disclosure, I currently have only the D&D beyond version. But you can see, from it, how the physical book is laid out.

And I just don't get the complaints.

If you know exactly what you want, alphabetical is not a bad way to organize.

But if you don't, the book is pretty good about helping with that .

The tables in the beginning are indexed in a variety of ways. Want to know where the dragon you need is, check the front index. Want to know where the demon you need is, check the front index.

Don't know exactly what you want? The tables at the front are indexed in a variety of ways to help.

From a reference perspective, which is what this book is, it's very easy to navigate. At least IMO.

 

[Distracted DM]

If you know exactly what you want, alphabetical is not a bad way to organize.

It's the inconsistency. You go to S for Blue Slaad. You go to B for Blue Dragon.

 

[Distracted DM]

Then again, I never was as pedantically attached to established D&D and TTRPG traditions as others in the hobby, I guess. I don’t give a toss about having all yugoloths, devils and demons grouped together.

I'm not sure if you intended your statement to be rude, but the use of pedantic makes it a bit rough on those of us that like things grouped how they were. I certainly didn't intend my comment to be insulting if it engendered that response! I was trying to acknowledge and thank you for speaking up and saying that it worked for you.

 

[Mort]

It's the inconsistency. You go to S for Blue Slaad. You go to B for Blue Dragon.

Missed that. Sure consistency is good.

 

[Stormonu]

I don't have the new MM, but how are they doing the dragons? I thought all the age categories were under the main dragon's heading.

On beyond, the Red dragon is as follows:

Adult Red Dragon
Ancient Red Dragon
Red Dragon Wyrmling
Red Dragon Youth

Shouldn't it be it starts with "Red Dragon" first, then have the age? Something like this ...

Red Dragon Hatchling
Red Dragon Youth
Red Dragon Young Adult
Red Dragon Adult
Red Dragon Old
Red Dragon Ancient
Red Dragon Wyrm

 

[Demetrios1453]

I don't have the new MM, but how are they doing the dragons? I thought all the age categories were under the main dragon's heading.

On beyond, the Red dragon is as follows:

Adult Red Dragon
Ancient Red Dragon
Red Dragon Wyrmling
Red Dragon Youth

Shouldn't it be it starts with "Red Dragon" first, then have the age? Something like this ...

Red Dragon Hatchling
Red Dragon Youth
Red Dragon Young Adult
Red Dragon Adult
Red Dragon Old
Red Dragon Ancient
Red Dragon Wyrm

Red Dragon Wyrmling
Young Red Dragon
Adult Red Dragon
Ancient Red Dragon

In that order, all under "Red Dragon"